Keywords
information integration theory
within-subject designs
between-subject designs
health risk assessment
How to Cite
Abstract
Within-subject designs (WSDs) remain unappreciated in psychology although many experimental tactics can reduce or eliminate the demand and order effects that WSDs tend to create. Comparative studies conducted in the Information Integration Theory (IIT) framework have shown that patterns of results observed using WSDs can largely be replicated using between-subject designs (BSDs). In order to add evidence to these findings, three additional studies were conducted in order to complement data obtained in previous studies. One of these studies was about health risk perception and tested the possibility to find evidence for a disjunctive rule of information integration using a BSD. The other two studies focused on the valuation process of IIT. The new findings regarding the disjunctive rule added support to the view that equivalent results can be obtained either with a highly economical repeated-measures design or with a much costlier independent factorial group arrangement. However, when the focus was on the valuation process and not on the integration process, ratings obtained in the BSD condition seemed to be restricted to a limited range of values by comparison with ratings obtained in the WSD condition. An explanation in terms of context effect is offered.
Anderson, N. H. (2001). Scientific psychology series. Empirical direction in design and analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Anderson, N. H. (2002). Methodology and statistics in single-subject experiments. In J. Wixted, (Ed.), Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology(Vol. 4, pp. 301-337). London: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Anderson, N. H. (2016). Information integration theory: Unified psychology based on three mathematıcal laws. Universitas Psychologica, 15(3), 1-7. http://
dx.doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy15-3.iitu
Anderson, N. H. (2018). Moral science. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Birnbaum, M. H. (1999). How to show that 9 > 221: Collect judgments in a between-subjects design. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 243-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.243
Cretenet, J., Mullet, E., & Dru, V. (2015). Motor and cognitive integration: Effect of bilateral behaviors on judgment. Acta Psychologica, 161, 64-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.08.004
Falconi, A., & Mullet, E. (2003). Cognitive algebra of love through the adult life. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 57(3), 277-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/NPQH-MDLX-F48U-AA35
Fox, R. (1992). Prejudice and the unfinished mind: A new look at an old failing. Psychological Inquiry, 3(2), 137-152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0302_12
Girard, M., & Mullet, E. (1997). Forgiveness in adolescents, young, middle-aged, and older adults. Journal of Adult Development, 4(4), 209-220. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02511412
Hermand, D., Mullet, E., & Lavieville, S. (1997). Perception of the Combined Effects of Smoking and Alcohol on Cancer Risks in Never Smokers and Heavy Smokers. Journal of Health Psychology, 2(4), 481-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910539700200405
Howe, E. S., & Loftus, T. C. (1992). Integration of intention and outcome information by students and circuit court judges: Design economy and individual differences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(2),102-116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb01524.x
Howe, E. S., & Loftus, T. C. (1996). Integration of certainty, severity, and celerity information in judged deterrence value: Further Evidence and Methodological Equivalence1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(3), 226-242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb01848.x
Leon, M. (1980). Integration of intent and consequence information in children’s moral judgments. In F. Wilkening, J. Becker, & T. Trabasso (Eds.), Information integration by children (pp. 71–97). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1996). Toward a new generation of personality theories: Theoretical contexts for the five-factor model. In J. S. Wiggins (Ed.), The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 51-87). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Mullet, E. (2012). The superfluous postulate of human rationality. Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali, 120(3), 269-288. Retrieved from https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:vep:journl:y:2012:v:120:i:3:p:269-288
Mullet, E., & Chasseigne, G. (2017). Assessing information integration processes: A comparison of findings obtained with between-subjects designs versus within-subjects designs. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1977-1988. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0592-6
Mullet, E., Cretenet, J., & Dru, V. (2014). Motor influences on judgment: Motor and cognitive integration. British Journal of Psychology, 105(1), 69-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12022
Mullet, E., López López, W., Kpanake, L., Mukashema, I., Armange, R., Kamble, S., … Neto, F. (2016). Functional Measurement in the field of ethics in politics. Universitas Psychologica, 15(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy15-3.fmf
Mullet, E., Sorum, P. C., Teysseire, N., Nann, S., Morales, G. E., Ahmed, R., … Muñoz Sastre, M. T. (2012). Functional Measurement in the field of empirical bioethics. Psicologica: International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology, 33, 665-681. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ980500.pdf
Muñoz Sastre, M. T., Mullet, E., & Sorum, P. (1999). Relationship between cigarette dose and perceived risk of lung cancer. Preventive Medicine, 28(6), 566-571. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1999.0482
Muñoz Sastre, M. T., Mullet, E., & Sorum, P. C. (2000). Self-assessment of inebriation from external indices. Addictive Behaviors, 25(5), 663-681.
Muñoz Sastre, M. T., Pecarisi, C., Legrain, E., Mullet, E., & Sorum, P. C. (2007). Acceptability in France of induced abortion for adolescents. American Journal of Bioethics, 7(8), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160701462368
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Construct validation of a triangular love scale. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27(3), 313-335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199705)27:3<313::AID-EJSP824>3.0.CO;2-4
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights. Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.